In some situations, it's valuable to determine if a seller is pocketing extra on the shipping. I have been charged $21 for Priority, then received Parcel Select instead. Perhaps one could say there's a case to be made for changed terms of sale, but the likely response'd be, "you eventually got it, didn't you?" This in fact, happened to me. No NAD for a switcheroo in shipping service. Add to that, if I'd wanted to say heck with it, you can have the thing back, I the buyer MUST foot the bill for sending it back *with tracking*. One would think a buyer had protections from this happening, but my experience proved otherwise. Return shipping was not refunded. MBG isn't perfect. I returned to Lithuania from the U.S.
Hide the cost of shipping by integrating it into the item price, and market as "free shipping" (when in truth, there is no such animal)? I've heard pros for that argument. A very successful business model for many sellers, no argument there. But let me explain another scenario.
Some buyers may want to know actual shipping for this reason: in a case of a partial refund (never done one, so I don't really know how it's calculated), the shipping costs wouldn't really come into play when determining the pro-rated value of the item in question (not of the transaction itself, which would've included the shipping, you see?). So a buyer charged an inflated shipping cost (far more than the actual shipping expense), unwittingly favors the seller in such a circumstance.
I recently saw an offer for a set of candles, pure beeswax, $3.99 and $27 shipping. Amazon charged $5 for the shipping the same weight/dimension item.
Yes, I know, "buyer beware." But what about the value of building buyer confidence?
It becomes important, I guess, when you see so many seller terms of sale state that shipping is non-refundable. The other day, I saw terms stating "sold as is, with no guarantees!" in a Used condition listing. (Not for parts and repair listing).
And if one were to really niggle about potential negative repercussions for a buyer resulting from being overcharged for shipping, a buyer insuring their item for replacement value (after they have it) is typically limited to recouping only fair market value of the item itself (what the thing sold for), which definitely does NOT include any costs of shipping, so a net loss there too.
I also find it objectionable when seller's hawk the cost of tracking and insurance to their buyers as being in the buyer's best interests (as was done to me), when we know only the person who has the shipping receipt files that claim with the service.
(Pet peeve, sorry to harp.)
So you see, there exist some bases for wanting an accurate figure for the cost of shipping and handling.
